About your Search

20130416
20130424
Search Results 0 to 9 of about 10 (some duplicates have been removed)
given all that's transpired over the last week. >> he was not read his miranda rights which a lot of people are talking about today. explain the reason why. >> well, in the law there's what they have called a public safety exception to miranda. everybody knows what miranda is. you have the right to remain silent. anything you say can and will be used against you. the police don't have to say that to you if they are in hot pursuit of something relating to public safety. maybe worried about bombs in this case. they're worried about another plot or something else happening. so under those circumstances authorities do not have to give the miranda warning immediately to a suspect. a lot of people out there saying on the right that they ought not give miranda rights or any other kinds of rights to people who are deemed terrorists. people on the left saying you ought to use the regular court to try to try these individuals. this is an ongoing debate about the law in this country. >> let's talk about the penalty that the younger suspect may face. we're still waiting for charges to be file
not been given his miranda warnings. and there's a lot of discussion about the legal avenues that might be taken. but, evyenia, as an interroga r interrogator, how much do you care about the legal discussions going on and does that effect how you go about your job? >> yes, the legal aspect is very, very important. that comes from levels above you. so if the law does allow you to not ask those miranda rights, you can proceed. but you cannot make up the rules as you go. if you do not follow the law, if you do deviate from it, the things you do could cost the case ultimately. any confession you could get could be thrown out or dismissed or anything like that. you want to make sure that you do follow the law even though you may feel otherwise, we have to be careful. >> all right. an experienced interrogator, thank you so much for joining us. appreciate it. >> thank you. >> we have some good news for all that flooding out west. we'll tell you what it is, your weather forecast coming up. hey! did you know that honey nut cheerios has oats that can help lower cholesterol? and it tastes good? s
be charged as early as today. investigators have not read him his miranda rights unwhat they call the public safety exception clause. so they may use any information he reveals as evidence in court. let's bring in christopher tritico, he defended the oklahoma city bomber, timothy mcveigh. christopher, thanks very much for coming in. he is a u.s. citizen. he was -- he received his naturalized citizenship last september 11th, of all dates. he's obviously in a hospital. crime was committed in the united states. if they don't read him his miranda rights right away, you okay with that? >> well, look. i think the public safety exception is being greatly and overly expanded in this instance. the public safety exception as the supreme court laid out is for an instance when an officer walks up on a situation and sees an empty holster and says where's your gun. that's to prevent an imminent threat from happening right then. what they are doing now is really expanding that public safety exception to say really the fifth amendment applies when they say it does and i don't think the supreme court is goin
's miranda rights. they said he could still pose a threat either because there are more bombs planted out there or he's connected to a larger terrorist cell. either way it has some lawmakers concerned. as investigators continue to interrogate their suspect some lawmakers argue he should be treated as an enemy combatant and denied an attorney for the time being. >> we should be allowed her intelligence-gathering purposes. >> investigators say they're still uncertain whether zocor and his brother tamerlan who died in a shoot-out on friday with police have any ties to fore te union issued a statement saying we must not waver from our tried and true justice system even in the most difficult of times. denial of rights is un-american and will only make it harder to obtain fair convictions. some liberal lawmakers agree and said they would be comfortable with tsarnaev being designated as an enemy combatant. >> i don't believe. it would beunconstitutional to >> it carries its own risk especially if that suspect is an american citizen. it could be challenged in court and that
time now we have a suspect who already was read his miranda rights. he already have a lawyer present. and i don't think that should affect any trained interrogator, any trained interviewer in doing their job. we have been doing this for many, many years. we did it against terrorist suspects, organized crimes, people who are charged with treason, spies, and it always worked, and it always gets the intended results. >> in terms of this breaking news that we've just got tonight. again, this is a senior government official saying that the initial interrogation of dzhokhar tsarnaev in his hospital bed, he says that he and his brother were not in touch with any overseas terrorists or groups. they conceived the attack on their own, motivated he told them by religious fervor. that's the language that i have been given. how -- how should that be approached in terms of strategically trying to unwind any threats that might exist beyond these young men? they're saying they acted alone. but presumably, the thing that made them want to do this could make other people want to do this as well. >> su
understand he has not been read his miranda rights, even if he can talk. what's the latest from the hospital? >> the latest official word from the hospital and through the f.b.i., the official channels releasing information is he's in serious condition and within the last 24 hours, that he's also in stable condition. so he is under the care of the physician here, clearly under heavy guard. we know he was shot in the throat because senator in the select intelligence committee has also given that information out. but that's really what we know for certain at this point in time. >> gretchen: there is this report this morning that maybe that throat wound was from an attempted suicide when the police were closing in on him, as you can see from the thermal imings of him in the boat friday night. what have you heard about that? >> well, that information doesn't come from the positions here -- physicians that are treating him and would have the closest eye view of his wounds. they're keeping all of his information to themselves as they're required to do by law and the f.b.i. not releasing that throu
the question this is exactly the whole issue going back to the miranda, if he had the public safety concern of what were those explosive devices intended for? that's one of the reasons they wanted to talk to him or one of the things thaw wanted to talk to him about at the time before they realized how severely hurt he was. it absolutely proves the point there could have more more attacks planned or another person who was a part of it who maybe at the last minute didn't do it. another reason to think there was more planned is maybe that's why they didn't kill themselves at the time of the marathon attack. they wanted to live to attack another day. >> jeff, somebody must have trained them. can you learn to build a bomb by yourself just by going to the internet and going out there, go to a home depot and buying this kind of stuff? >> you could try to learn, but what you would certainly want to do is rehearse. you don't want to go through the operational energy that it would take to mount an attack like at the marathon without having a fair degree of confidence that your device is going to work
that they don't have to read him his miranda rights right away. as time passes, does the justification for that exception grow weaker? are they on ls strong ground? >> it sure does, because as you know, miranda rights are a bedrock constitutional principle. we all have the right to remain silent, t get an attorney and be advised of those rights. the public safety exemption is a very narrow exemption. there has to be an imminent threat to the public. it certainly seems less imminent. >> don't officials who say the terror is over, don't they kind of undercut that argument, and does it really matter in the end? >> this is certainly an argument that's going to be handed to this defendant's defense attorney when that time comes. there have been contradictory statements made that there is no public threat, there is no ticking bomb, thank goodness, apparently, based on what we know so far. so we're giving them an argument to use later. >> the issue is, the questioning that's permitted without miranda is very narrow in scope, correct? >> yes. it's about what the public threat is. it's not all
Search Results 0 to 9 of about 10 (some duplicates have been removed)